IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Softwood Lumber: Exact Significance of the Recent Canadian Victory before the WTO and Prospects in the Context of the Pending Second Lumber Case

  • Benitah, Marc
Registered author(s):

    Recently, the WTO Panel in charge of the softwood lumber case brought by Canada against the United States ruled in favor of Canada. The “benefit conferred” criterion played a critical role in the ruling, which concluded that the United States used a flawed cross-border methodology to demonstrate the existence of such a benefit. However, the Canadian victory would have been more decisive if the WTO panel had found the absence of a governmental financial contribution. The cross-border methodology will be once again at the heart of the pending second lumber case before the WTO. This article evaluates the prospects for the case in this context.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade in its journal Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy.

    Volume (Year): 03 (2002)
    Issue (Month): 2 ()

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:23925
    Contact details of provider: Postal: Suite 820, 410 22nd Street East, Saskatoon SK, S7K 5T6
    Phone: (306) 244-4800
    Fax: (306) 244-7839
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:23925. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.